Comments on: Memo to mainstream media: Girardi relying on hitter-pitcher matchups is not sabermetricshttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/
Baseball. Baseball. And then a bit more baseball.Tue, 20 Mar 2018 01:46:00 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: Yankees start offseason by firing pitching coach – Washington Post | The Fresno Newshttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/comment-page-2/#comment-119817
Fri, 18 Mar 2011 07:01:39 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-119817[…] coach Eiland won't be backMLB.comYankees Fire Pitching Coach Dave EilandFanHouseGirardi relying on hitter-pitcher matchups is not sabermetricsmsnbc.comNESN.com -ESPN -New York Times (blog)all 246 news […]
]]>By: Bob Klapisch gets three more years in which to bury Joe Girardi | HardballTalkhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-87521
Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:02:19 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-87521[…] that ripping Girardi for actually playing the percentages is anything new for Klapisch. But even if Klapisch can’t help himself, you’d think the […]
]]>By: Joe Girardi, Yankees on verge of three-year, $9 million deal | HardballTalkhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-87392
Thu, 28 Oct 2010 15:19:41 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-87392[…] all active managers and ranks 19th all time among everyone who managed at least 500 games. And he has a binder. Skip to Comments (2) Tweet « Newer Sandy Alderson is getting the old band […]
]]>By: MLB Playoff Predictions (Part 3) |http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-87224
Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:56:28 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-87224[…] and without the hep of sabremetrics. And those people, are idiots. No, Joe Girardi looking at small sample pitching match-ups is not the downfall of sabremetics. Nor does Tampa’s Divisional five game disappointment mean […]
]]>By: fquaye149http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86757
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:55:19 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86757Let me get this straight, all you commenters arguing that Girardi is using “SABRmetrics” when he uses the splits book. You are arguing that Girardi is practicing SABRmetrics by using numbers because he is using numbers when he looks at splits rather than looking at non-numbers like season long Batting Average or Home Runs like other non-SABRmetrics-using, non-numbers-using managers might have? Gotcha….
]]>By: obo1892http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86745
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 12:56:23 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86745user*
]]>By: obo1892http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86742
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 12:51:02 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86742Suppose a=b
a^2=ab
2a^2=a^2+ab
2a^a-2ab=a^2+ab-2ab
2a^2-2ab=a^2-ab
2(a^2-ab)=(a^2-ab)
2=1

Does misusing math demonstrate a flaw in the use or does it demonstrate a flaw in mathematics itself?

]]>By: lordd99http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86729
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 08:33:53 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86729Not only is this not fair to sabermetrics, it’s probably also not fair to Joe Girardi.

Girardi does have a lot of statistics at hand, and studies probably as intensely as any MLB manager. He was an engineering major at Northwestern. I think we all know engineering types. They like their numbers. Let us also not forget that Girardi was a professional MLB player and a catcher. He of all people knows that small sample sizes mean nothing. A player being 1-6 against a specific pitcher is simply a data point, but it not the determining factor. As I’ve heard Girardi explain at varies times, he’ll look at the match-up of hitter vs. pitcher. Does the pitcher throw a slider? Is the hitter good against sliders? He’ll consider how the hitter actually performed in the ABs against specific pitchers, not necessarily the final result, because a small sample size means nothing. The player going 1-6 might have actually scorched the ball all six times against the pitcher. He considers all these aspects, but just because he binder says the player was 1-6 doesn’t mean that stat determined anything.

]]>By: cktaihttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86728
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 06:33:48 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86728Gotta hate statheads like Joe Buck and McCarver who keep whining about Howard’s lack of RBIs and all the writers wile Paul Hoynes who care about nothing then the win stat.

Actually sabermetrics is the analyses of baseball statistics. Part of this analyses is noticing when data is insufficient or just plain wrong. This is why sabermetricians are cautious in using batting average and shy away from RBI and pitcher wins altogether. Sabermetricians will acknowledge the danger of small sample size, and (s)he will know that the larger sample of the whole season against multiple pitchers is more valuable then the small sample against a specific pitcher. Proper analyses will tell you not to follow hitter/pitcher matchups. If you decide to follow it anyway then you are as much a sabermetrician as an astrologer is a physicist.

]]>By: Kevin S.http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86705
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 00:28:53 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86705As Dave Cameron over at Fangraphs noted, the same issues applied in Texas as in YSIII.
]]>By: churchoftheperpetuallyoutragedhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86692
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:48:44 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86692It wasn’t just the previous starts against Texas. Hughes is also an extreme fly ball pitcher, and in YSIII that’s not a good thing (SSS alert). He was also better on the road than at home (mostly due to the previous comment).
]]>By: Kevin S.http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86685
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:14:34 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86685In Girardi’s defense, he actually did that to allow Pettitte as much time to rest as possible.
]]>By: quintjshttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86674
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 21:15:35 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86674Any amount of data, even one piece of data is valid and a fact, but it has no predictive value, and you need to look at what the data is.

PRIME example and the worst by far of all of Girardi’s decisions – starting Hughes in game 2 (& therefore 6) in Texas because he had good numbers in Texas.

He was a rookie then, unknown. It was years ago, it was against a Texas lineup where half of the guys he faced are out of baseball because they were so terrible. Texas now have a really good potent lineup with speed and power.

While the numbers were good, if you looked into the numbers, you would see it was a small sample size, and of no real value. And that was the stated reason by Girardi.

]]>By: rbabaseballhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86661
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:36:35 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86661So the question here is whether the term “sabermetrics” implies “sound baseball analysis.” If you think it doesn’t necessarily imply that, then you can believe that the small-sample-size, Joe Girardi tactics are sabermetrics. I, however, disagree. It may be semantics, but I believe that “sabermetrics,” like the term “statistics,” implies sound analysis.

For example, if I flipped a coin 5 times, collected that data, and then used it to presume that the coin would come up heads on the next flip, that would *not* be sound statistics. If I had put that on one of my tests in grad school, I would have likely been kicked out of the program. Thus, I wouldn’t say that I was using “statistics” to make that conclusion. I see this in the same way. If the data is used incorrectly, or at least to make a conclusion that isn’t sound, then it’s not sabermetrics under my definition of the term.

]]>By: Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heywardhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86656
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:22:52 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86656If a Sabermatician eats a big piece of poo on three separate occasions and determines the poo is not good to eat at least 2/3 of the time, does that mean we should eat poo?
]]>By: MLB Press Conference Day | Blog Archive | Getting Blanked | Blogs | TheScore.comhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86654
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:15:41 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86654[…] to negotiating, because as Aaron Gleeman points out, baseball writers seem to be assuming that anything involving numbers is somehow sabermetric.How To Immediately Endear Yourself To Local FanbaseAfter Toronto Blue Jays GM Alex Anthopoulos […]
]]>By: Mark Armourhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86653
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:14:53 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86653It means nothing. Sabermetrics is a science, and as such it is based on objective and measurable facts. Each event that takes place on a baseball field is a fact worth measuring and using those facts is sabermetrics. The more facts you have, and the more facile you become with those facts, the better the sabermetrics is. But the fundamental premise of sabermetrics from the beginning has been to use objective data over your gut or your instincts. This is not difficult.
]]>By: The Dangerous Mabryhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86650
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:09:25 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86650By that argument, the fact that he’s wearing a hat means he’s involved in fashion, the fact that he writes out a lineup card means he’s a calligrapher, and the fact that he walks out to the pitcher’s mound means he’s a hiker.
]]>By: rbabaseballhttp://mlb.nbcsports.com/2010/10/25/girardi-relying-on-hitter-pitcher-matchups-is-not-sabermetrics/#comment-86648
Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:00:31 +0000http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=21944#comment-86648Respectfully, using data in this way is exactly what makes it “not science.” Statisticians abhor the use of small sample sizes to make any predictions and in fact would be loath to say *anything at all* based on 10, 15, 20 plate appearances. To follow the analogy of the moon, using data the way that Girardi does it (or as is espoused here) would be like looking at the moon’s position on August 23 at 8:43 PM, November 2 at 10:51 PM, and January 14 at 9:44 PM and then trying to predict where it will be on May 5 using just those 3 readings. Sure, the data collection is scientific, but the *use* of it is far, far from it.

This is what sunk Elias vis-a-vis Bill James; Elias was always trying to make the most minute diagnoses (which are useless) while James was trying to approach it scientifically. Unfortunately, those garbage statistics have spawned a whole generation of people like Girardi who thinks that they mean something.

If you go outside and observe where the moon is, and you write the co-ordinates down in your notebook, that is “object data” and the recording and analysis of that data is “science”. Whether there is enough data there to determine where the moon will be tomorrow is an interesting question, but this does not make the data any less factual, nor the process any less of a science